Site Search Navigation

Site Navigation

Site Mobile Navigation

The Aftermath of “Israel v. Iran”

By The Staff February 1, 2012 12:20 pmFebruary 1, 2012 12:20 pm

In the week since Ronen Bergman’s article was first posted, there has been an intense amount of discussion and reaction, predictably varied in tone and point of view. Some responses, though, bear mentioning. Two days after the article appeared, a high-ranking Israeli official called Bergman to clarify that on the question of international legitimacy, Israel requires no more than an “understanding” of its need to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities. The official made clear they are “not looking for the international community’s support or consent” or even tacit approval, “but rather a sympathetic view of Israel’s difficult situation.”

Here in the United States, at the annual assessment of threats facing the nation, which took place yesterday in Washington, Senator Dianne Feinstein, chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, read from the article during her opening remarks (at minute 32:30 of C-Span video) and then asked James Clapper, the director of national intelligence, and David Petraeus, the C.I.A. director, for their reactions to the story. In their back and forth, Feinstein also revealed that she met with the Mossad director Tamir Pardo last week. Bergman writes from Israel that, according to intelligence sources, “the story was discussed extensively during meetings with the Mossad chief in D.C. and that the Americans were upset that it revealed secrets from their negotiations with Israel.”

Bruce Grierson wrote this week’s cover story about Ellen Langer, a Harvard psychologist who has conducted experiments that involve manipulating environments to turn back subjects’ perceptions of their own age.Read more…